A profession in the making : insights from a translation culture

1. A profession in the making:insights from a translation culture Kristina Mullamaa Universityof Tartu, Estonia

2. Research on practising liaison interpreters in Estonia • Specific translation culture (Prunč 1997) • Interdependence of the developing of a professional role with the societal processes at the macro and micro levels • Favourable conditions for developing some principles and strategies?

3. Why this topic? • Currently, our official training programmes mainly educate interpreters for the conference domain, mainly for the EU institutions (cf. http://www.fl.ut.ee/93587). • Liaisoninterpreting receives no special mention on the website of the organisation uniting professional translators and interpreters (www.ettl.ee) • We wonder what has been happening on the local market.

4. We suggest that • the interpreting situations may have changed in tune with the socio-political and economic changes of the last 15 years. • there is a need for interpreters for these situations. • the more relaxed communication patterns may have influenced the interpreting triad.

5. Hypotheses: • 1) Liaison interpreting is practised in Estonia. • 2) The role of the liaison interpreter here often entails more interaction than the Code (cf. Wadensjö 1998, Linell 1997, 1998) and training prescribed "machine" model (cf. Tate and Turner 1997/2002).

6. 3) The more dynamic role of liaison interpreters can be viewed in the light of, and to an extent accounted for by the individualisation and democratisation processes. • 4) the notions of "professional self" and "personal self" can be introduced for analysing the interpreter´s role.

7. We have carried out the research in three stages: • 1.preliminary interviews (7) and questionnaires (7) (2003-2004) • 2.   in-depth interviews (14) (2005-2006) • 3.  follow-up questionnaires ( 8) ( 2006 )

8. Methodology • Ethnography (http://writing.colostate.edu/references/research/observe/com3a1.cfm) • convergent interviewing (see principles at http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/iview.html)) • The average duration of an interview was 90 minutes (i.e. including the greetings, warm-up, questions by the interviewee). The average duration of recorded time:45 minutes.

9. Participants: 14 practitioners in the field • work between Estonian and Danish, English, Finnish, German, Norwegian, Swedish and Russian. • Chaining:(http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/ethno.htm). • Professional organisations

10. All recordings were made openly, with participant permission and consent. * The recordings were made with Panasonicmicrocasette recorder (Model RN-502), on 60-minute Sony microcassettes.

11. field-notes takenimmediately afterthe interviews. • valuable material concerning theprofiles of participants and also their views on and insights into the interpreter’srole.

12. Participants are numbered following the order the in-depth interviews took place. • All excerpts (217) from participant responses used as examples are numbered • Full transcripts available at www.art.ee/thesistranscripts

13. Terminology • No clearly formulated Code of professional conduct as a separate document. • The rules of interpreter interaction are nevertheless explicit, as presentedat www.ettl.ee and introduced at our interpreter training courses. • The principlesbear a strong resemblance to what in IS is referred to as the transfer, conduit, Code, code or machine model of interpreting ( cf. e.g. Wadensjö 1998, Tate and Turner19976/2002et al.), and and what in many sources (cf. ibid.) is described to be the prevalent conception behind many Codes of ethics/Codes of professional conduct. • For the sake of brevity, we refer to these principles as the Code or Code model.

14. Interview results:1. Conceptualising the role • Many participants(P3, P9, P10, P12, P13)have let the role-conception be formed during different interpreting situations • 36. P14: This has developed out of practice itself. • 37. P14: I cannot …see this as a profession. For me, the task of the interpreter is to be the mediator between people, the one who connects and unites.

15. 2. Liaison vs. conference interpreting • ForP1, P2, P4, P5, P6, P8, P9, P10, P12, P13, P14the difference between these two modes of interpreting lies mainly in the different communication model. • Liaison interpreting – the one allowing for more interaction – is considered to be more suitable for their personality.

16. 40. P4: Well I like to interpret more in this situation. Because then mypersonality exists as well [...]. I remember the conferences and the more formal [interpreting] situations – • 43. P9: But of course, when you are working in a booth at a conference, then you are like a computer. Then you don’t have any personality to back you up. But at a seminar there is…you will have a personal relationship at once

17. 3. The Code model vs. interaction4. Relations with clients • 3.,4. The Code was perceived as both adequate for communication (P7, P3, P11) and not fully in tune with this (P1, P4, P5, P6, P8, P9, P10, P12, P13, P14).

18. 50. P12: interpreting inliaison, in a role that’s more free, you have to depart from the audience. Theaudiences are very different. Sometimes groups of friends meet [...]. And when the interpreter would be there verymuch of an official, very conventional – it would ruin the atmosphere andwould become…would make the atmosphere freezing. Or at least the interpreter himself would have a negative and hindering effect on it.

19. Among other important considerations, the role of interpreter as an advisor (P3) as well as a cultural advisor (P4, P6, P10, P12, P13) was referred to: • 110. P14: Creating the background. Explaining the thing plus explaining what context we are moving in right now. Because the person entailed may not always grasp it./.../. Well, what I interpret here – in the middle – he will put it into his context. But this is not the same context./.../And this is why I see it so that the interpreter’s job is also that of the one who is uniting the two parties, and establishing the background and context as well.

20. * each rolemodified by a specific commission (P6, P9, P12): • 63. P6: each time when I am offered a job I actually think a little ahead of “what will my role be”. Will it just be to mediate – one party speaks and I forward this, or – often especially in the context of Estonia – you have to be…there will be something additional. You will not just be an interpreter, a so-to-say machine, who interprets from one language into another, but there are additional things. And…and these are rather different, for example,…well, in the countryside, right…?

21. * the importance of empathy even if it goes against explicit rules (P1, P3, P9, P6, P5, P8, P10, P12, P13): • 64.P6: There is interpreting and such a thing, then you will have to help the person who comes here and, so to say, help them to manage in this context here /.../ And this is again such an…/.../ ugly thing that…that actually you don’t have the right to do this. Actually you simply have to plainly interpret from one language into another. But…but if you do not explain, the other party will not get it.

22. * interpreter interaction has proved to be effective, accepted and approved by clients (P1, P5, P4, P6, P9, P10, P12, P13, P14). • Importantly, many participants (P6, P9, P4, P2, P12) also point to the importance of both life and interpretingexperience in becoming more convinced in one’s right in making holistic pro-communication decisions.

23. 79. P6: And something else I do now and then, and whathas come during those later years when you have more experience and alsolife experience, the mediator must now and then also explain – this isnot the role of the interpreter – but say, […] you have to explain some things –why for example a Swede does [things] like this, why does he say [things]like this and what are his expectations and goals that you perceive but whathe does not utter explicitly. And in the same way you have to tell the Swedethat the Estonian – what he wants, why does he do certain things, and so on,and this is also so to say – part of the role in fact.

24. The relaxed atmosphere will ensure maximum quality (P5, P6, P4, P10, P12, P13), an “enormous inspiration, even a glow” (P10).

25. Difference betweenwhat some participants describe as essential to their role in the theoretical description of their role and in their real-life examples: • 56. P3: The interpreter must simply be a mediator without any human qualities, without showing his personality. You must be unnoticeable. You may not overshadow the person you are working with. • 57. P3:But in actual fact the interpreter may happen to find herself in the role of a secret advisor.

26. 5. The interpreter and ethics • Discrepancy due to factual mistakes (P1, P5) • one of the primary parties telling a lie (P4, P7, P10), • something unethical, "things that are embarrassing to interpret" (P5).

27. Warnings issued in especially challenging situations (cf. personal- professional self) • 128. P14: This is a very good question, because it shows that I am not veryprofessional. When I see for example that a Finn is cheated – I will tell theperson later – “you should think about it”. I won’t tell them straight – listen,you are deceived in this, this and this, but I do say: “you need to thinktwice”.

28. 129. P14: I do this because – I think it comes from the principle of honesty.

29. 6. The interpreter´s role and self (neutrality, power) • An explicit conflict was mentioned between the role (professional self) and (personal) self also in emotional situations: • 133. P3: I have also had to visit a mental asylum. My personality and role get to a certain extent confused there

30. 6.1. Most participants acknowledged that there lies a potential power in the mediary´s role: • 152. P4: Yes. I…sometimes I´ve been thinking myself - aren´t we actually ….aren´t we going on in my direction or path with this thing…/../Isn´t it hidden here - I am helping…but this is still - then it will be going in the direction I helped [it to go].

31. 8,9.Crossing borders between societies, mentalities, ethical considerations • Interpreters conceptualise their role through mediating between societies, different mindsets, values. • Theyperceive a change in society comparing the Soviet period, the beginning of the 1990s and today. • Today the personal self is more free in general. • For many (P5, P4, P9, P8, P10), this entails changes also in the interpreted events, as well as the role of interpreter:

32. 190. P5: I actually think that communication has changed /…/. /…/…maybe this is the events in themselves and the way of organising things that have changed, yes./…/I think I do behave differently now, yes. That this has…influenced me.

33. Participants (P7, P9, P4, P6, P1, P2) reportthat they help to mediate important values and knowledge: • 183.P7: The different, so to say, values of two different societies, right. That indeed a very…humane Scandinavia or Germany, which is in a way…which is still relatively putting the individual in the middle of everything, and where one tries to take into account the minorities and differences and individuality, right. We have little of this.

34. 193. P9:Definitely a lot.Take for example the field of family planning and sexual education – well they have topics which are very complicated/…/. Well, for us, this is…In this respect that they have had this education for already … the union is 80 years old, it has been an obligatory subject at schools for 50 years./.../this is really a missionary work./.../For example in Sweden, orphanages as institutions have been practically closed down. Everything goes through families.This is importing a change in the worldview. Right!

35. Results: • 1. There is a group of interpreters who specialise in liaison interpreting. • 2. Their self-descriptions yield an interesting picture of increased interpreter interaction, where at the same time neutrality is observed in the interests of the clients.

36. 3. Interpreters resorted to scrutinising their role implications concerning their personal vs. professional self. • These notions could therefore be introduced for analysing the interpreter´s role – in pedagogy, research and for practising interpreters.

37. 4. Interpreters conceptualise their role through mediating between societies, different mindsets, values.

38. The results can be used when • when sketching future Code d´honneurs that would also take into consideration the specific intricacies of a liaison interpreter´s work. • intraining (cf. Sandrelli 2001). • by practitioners.

39. Differently from some earlier results where * Increased interpreter interaction has beenexplainedthrough asymmetrical power relations and socio-economic backgrounds of primary parties (Wadensjö 1992, 1998, Pöllabauer 2003, 2005), * the one side being seriously disadvantaged was referred to to in discussing whether the interpreter should exceed the traditional "machine" role (Tate and Turner 1997/2002)

40. Our piece of research has illustrated that practitioners do feel the need for exceeding the Code limits also in symmetrical liaison interpreting situations. • It is the nature ofordinary human communication and the obligation to explain the message to the clearest and best possible extent (Linell 1997, 1998) that sometimes dictate this.

41. Differently from a very strong inclusion of the self • (cf. Katan, Straniero-Sergio 2001, Angelelli 2004). • in our research the self does not come too strongly to the fore.

42. There is an interesting new model emerging where there is a strong involvement of the personal self (values, ethics, evaluation). • At the same time, all this seldom comes to the fore - the exception being seriously challenging ethical dilemmas.

43. Usually the professional self (neutrality, principles of professional practice, cf. Code of honour, Code of practice) sees to itthat the personal self would not become the goal rather than a means.

44. A profession in the making? • Until recently the mode of conferenceinterpreting seems to have enjoyedamoreestablished and officiallymorerecognisedstatus in Estonia. • While there are rather many practitioners who share such insights, principles andstrategies... • liaison interpreting has been shown to exist and fill a niche of its own. • Some of the existing rules could be reviewed, andtraining for liaison interpreters provided also in this country.

45. On a broader societal level the establishment of liaison interpreting as aviable field of specialisation could be considered a sign of developeddemocracies • professional training programmes exist in the Nordic Countries,Australia, New Zeeland, the Canadian Northwest territories (Baker, Malmkaer2000: 34), • in many of them there are also professional associations. • Also differentCodes of professional practice exist for different modalities of interpreting(cf. http://www.sktl.net/).

46. At least in our specific context the development of theprofession has gone hand in hand with the democratisation and individualisationprocesses too.

47. Another positive sign is that for the first time in history sign language interpreters are started to be trained atTartu University in September 2006 (PM 04.04.2006). Possibly, the time is ripe for accepting the different modalities and modes of interpreting.

48. Estonia as a transition country • can be seen as a good place for observing the processes related to the developing of the profession in a complex and “compressed” way. • Quickly transforming socio-economicenvironment; • I & II sector into the III in 10-15 yrs. • rapid changes in value orientations (Realo 1998).

49. Lauristin (1997: 38): “In the countries of East and Central Europe today,we canobserve how‘catching up’ with the technological and institutional forms of Westernmodernization is occurring simultaneously with theadoption of the valuesand patterns of post-industrial culture [...] the simultaneousness of twonormally sequential phases of cultural development makes post-Communistsocieties internally even more controversial and difficult to understand”.

50. “individualist culturewith a certain degree of collectivism” (Realo 1998: 35) • “ a strong post-modern shift towards an individualisation of values” from 1991 (Lauristin, Vihalemm 1997: 256). • “both the Swedes and Finns placed significantly more emphasis on values like EQUALITY AND OBEDIENT than the Estonians” (Verkasalo et al 1994).